Re: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation?
Dominik and all, I agree with Dominik here. The cap is too high by a factor of 10 at least! Domain name speculation should be eliminated all together given that such are a form of public interest property although that has yet to be defined difinitively under law. But at a minimum, speculation on Domain Names themselves is a bad practice that should in no way be encouraged. -----Original Message----- >From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx> >Sent: Mar 25, 2008 6:51 AM >To: domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx >Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [ga] Current Drafted Motion - Another Sort of Speculation? > > >The current motion drafted by the GNSO Council seems to be another >attempt to keep the speculation aspect of AGP. The whole document is >vague and raises more questions than answers. > >1. >a. The 10% AGP cap proposed in the document is still too high. After >calculating the net gains at some, not all, Registrars during the last >month as available at >http://www.webhosting.info/registrars/fastest-growing-registrars/global/ >?ob=nc&oo=desc, >the total number of new net-gained domains during last month is greater >than 1,220,000. Provided the very most of the new registrations are .COM >domains and other gTLD domains 1,000,000 domains can be considered a >reasonable estimation of domains that qualify for the 10% cap of free >deletes. > >That is, 100,000 domains per month constantly available for speculation. > > >b. The exemption from the application of such restriction under >extraordinary circumstances is unclear and not specified. > >What are such extraordinary circumstances like? > >Who will be considering and will finally accept the documented showing >of such circumstances? >Are they Registries interested in running the domain business? > >What is the maximum cap after applying the exemption? 100%? Or even >more? > > >2. >What will the oversight activities at ICANN look like? > >Where is the guarantee that the oversight activities will actually take >place and will not be neglected or misused? > >Will the GNSO be responsible for the oversight activities? >The GNSO trapped by financial interests of Registries and Registrars as >clearly demonstrated in the two recommendations presented to the board? >The GNSO that does not even bother to seriously consider the mostly >supported suggestion from the public input, which is elimination of AGP? > >And finally, who will be paying another bureaucratic staff and its >questionable mission? >Registrants? > > >Dominik Filipp, a GA list member > Regards, Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Phone: 214-244-4827